Peter King on Mike & Mike

[mcsully]

I know we have a long thread about this but felt it was important to point out..


He said that Walsh has nothing more than what we already know and doens't believe anything will come of it..

King has some great contacts.. And I say this is gold and the issue should be dead shortly.

 

[Sean Pa Patriot]

About the smartest thing he has said in a month.. But I guess Espn wont be satisfied with that...

 

[groundgame]

I used to read King's articles thinking they were humorous with his year-round obsession of the Red Sox. Now, I see nothing funny about his writing and find Bill Simmons pieces a better use of time.

 

[Rob0729]

It is generally believed by most people following this story closely in the media that Walsh has nothing new.

I saw Mike Fish on ESPN (one of the guys who outted Walsh) and he said that he didn't realize the Patriots admitted to videotaping signals from 2000 on until Goodell spoke to the media right before the Super Bowl. So I assume when he was speaking to Walsh neither of them knew the Pats admitted that they did this practice this far back. That also makes me assume that Walsh probably thought that him doing back in 2000-2003 was bigger news than it really was. I do think Walsh got involved with this think he had a bombshell, but really has nothing.

 

[upstater1]

It is generally believed by most people following this story closely in the media that Walsh has nothing new.

I saw Mike Fish on ESPN (one of the guys who outted Walsh) and he said that he didn't realize the Patriots admitted to videotaping signals from 2000 on until Goodell spoke to the media right before the Super Bowl. So I assume when he was speaking to Walsh neither of them knew the Pats admitted that they did this practice this far back. That also makes me assume that Walsh probably thought that him doing back in 2000-2003 was bigger news than it really was. I do think Walsh got involved with this think he had a bombshell, but really has nothing.

Odd that Fish would say that when Mortenson reported in Sept. on ESPN tat Belichick had been doing it for awhile. Only the videotapes were recent.

 

[Rob0729]

Odd that Fish would say that when Mortenson reported in Sept. on ESPN tat Belichick had been doing it for awhile. Only the videotapes were recent.

Well, John Clayton did "break" the story that Walsh never had a confidentiality agreement about a month after Fish did. It seems that no one pays attention to what the other guy is reporting over at ESPN.

It could be that Fish knows what Walsh has and trying to minimize the damage to his reputation for bringing Walsh into the forefront.

 

[Mooch]

It is generally believed by most people following this story closely in the media that Walsh has nothing new.

I saw Mike Fish on ESPN (one of the guys who outted Walsh) and he said that he didn't realize the Patriots admitted to videotaping signals from 2000 on until Goodell spoke to the media right before the Super Bowl. So I assume when he was speaking to Walsh neither of them knew the Pats admitted that they did this practice this far back. That also makes me assume that Walsh probably thought that him doing back in 2000-2003 was bigger news than it really was. I do think Walsh got involved with this think he had a bombshell, but really has nothing.

The timing is certainly interesting to say the least. My guess is when Walsh caught wind that his "bombshell" about prior videotaping signals was a dud, he invented the Rams Video Walkthrough story for some reason and leaked it to the Herald. The rest of this indemnification fiasco over the past few months is nothing more than Walsh's way to try to wriggle out of it and avoid being named in a defamation lawsuit. It would explain why the Patriots, the NFL and all the wired beat writers think there's nothing new to the story, as well as Specter backing off the issue AND the Rams player dropping his lawsuit.

 

[Rob0729]

The timing is certainly interesting to say the least. My guess is when Walsh caught wind that his "bombshell" about prior videotaping signals was a dud, he invented the Rams Video Walkthrough story for some reason and leaked it to the Herald. The rest of this indemnification fiasco over the past few months is nothing more than Walsh's way to try to wriggle out of it and avoid being named in a defamation lawsuit. It would explain why the Patriots, the NFL and all the wired beat writers think there's nothing new to the story, as well as Specter backing off the issue AND the Rams player dropping his lawsuit.

No the Rams' walkthrough rumor has been around for a while. Tom Curran wrote about it on his blog last September, but he basically dismissed it as rubbish at the time.

 

[Mooch]

No the Rams' walkthrough rumor has been around for a while. Tom Curran wrote about it on his blog last September, but he basically dismissed it as rubbish at the time.

But Walsh, as a former Pats employee, intentionally gave life to the story by leaking it to the Herald. I probably shouldn't have said "invented" since you are correct that the rumor was out there before. That was a poor word choice.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Basically, in September and October it was open season on rumors involving the Patriots. I remember Rich Gannon claiming that not only did the Pats have defensemen tape his signals during the Snow Bowl, he claims that he heard the tape the next season. How he could possibly have dismissed it then, and only now have a problem with it?

 

[PonyExpress]

I may be in the minority on this, but I don't believe Walsh was the direct source of the Herald story. I don't give Tomase enough credit for that. My guess is he got it second hand through a media source or NFL insider he trusted.

My feeling is there wasn't enough independent verification for a major news outlet (such Pravda aka ESPN) to run with it, so they planted the story with a stooge from a hick paper like Tomase. Then the expendable stooge would take the scrutiny and the rest of the media could party.

My candidates for the Herald "source" are Mike Phish; the global warming fascist from ESPN's TMQB; or Borges (revenge from the grave). The "source" was tipped in Walsh's direction by a league source, probably by Tannenbaum. BTW, what has Borges been up to the past 12 months?

 

[Rob0729]

Basically, in September and October it was open season on rumors involving the Patriots. I remember Rich Gannon claiming that not only did the Pats have defensemen tape his signals during the Snow Bowl, he claims that he heard the tape the next season. How he could possibly have dismissed it then, and only now have a problem with it?

Yeah, I remember that. Supposably the team got a videotape sent to them anonymously with enhanced audio during the following offseason. Yet, no one with the Raiders could produce the tape.

 

[Rob0729]

I may be in the minority on this, but I don't believe Walsh was the direct source of the Herald story. I don't give Tomase enough credit for that. My guess is he got it second hand through a media source or NFL insider he trusted.

My feeling is there wasn't enough independent verification for a major news outlet (such Pravda aka ESPN) to run with it, so they planted the story with a stooge from a hick paper like Tomase. Then the expendable stooge would take the scrutiny and the rest of the media could party.

My candidates for the Herald "source" are Mike Phish, the global warming fascist from ESPN's TMQB, or Borges (revenge from the grave).

I agree with you. I think with all the Walsh stuff breaking, Tomasse rushed the rumor he had already heard probably a dozen times before to press. I don't know if Walsh is the source either especially since the source wasn't sure if the videographer acted alone or was ordered or if the videoprapher gave it to anyone in the staff.

Personally, I don't think there is a specific source of the story. Tomase probably just ran with a rumor he had heard several times before and accreditted it to an unnamed source in the organization.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Basically, in September and October it was open season on rumors involving the Patriots. I remember Rich Gannon claiming that not only did the Pats have defensemen tape his signals during the Snow Bowl, he claims that he heard the tape the next season. How he could possibly have dismissed it then, and only now have a problem with it?

If that's true, then Gannon and the Raiders are more inept than I thought. The story for years has been that the Raiders didn't change their audibles after Gruden left for Tampa Bay and when those two teams met in the Super Bowl, the Bucs knew the play from hearing the audibles. That might explain the 5 ints (2 for TDs IIRC) in that game. If you don't change your signals, you've got nobody to blame but yourself.

 

[bigjunk1]

If you don't change your signals, you've got nobody to blame but yourself.

Or you could cry to the commissioner and have them take away your rival's 1st round draft pick, fine them 750K, and smear their legacy.

 

[Topher]

Wasn't Walsh with the team the last year Pete Carroll was coach? Although I doubt the NFL would reveal anything damaging about the past regime, it would be interesting to know if Walsh says anything like "I was taping signals since I got here in 99."

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Has anyone ever seen confirmation that Walsh is, in the fact, the source quoted by the Herald?

It was the conclusion everyone jumped to, but it's entirely possible that they got it from someone even more shady.

Before we say that Walsh made up the walk-through story, I think it's important to understand that his version may very well be that he never said this to the Herald. If that is his story, by the way, and the Herald doesn't refute it, there is a good chance it's true.

The Herald can't be forced to reveal its source. But if their source publicly denies being the source, they no longer have to offer him protection -- they could and would publicly defend themselves by saying, "yes, he is the source," and even playing tapes or showing notes if they have them.

 

[Kontradiction]

I know we have a long thread about this but felt it was important to point out..


He said that Walsh has nothing more than what we already know and doens't believe anything will come of it..

King has some great contacts.. And I say this is gold and Walsh should be dead shortly.

I corrected it for you. :rocker:

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

Or you could cry to the commissioner and have them take away your rival's 1st round draft pick, fine them 750K, and smear their legacy.

Yeah, that would work, too!

 

[Ras]

This will not be dead issue if nothing comes from the Walsh interview. Jerk-off fans and sports writers looking to make a name for themselves will continue to beat this drum for a long time.